place_order

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals order types and optional TIF/brackets but does not state that this is a live financial action, whether confirmation or order ID is returned, or what connection/account prerequisites apply.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; compactly enumerates key order types and optional features while keeping the primary action explicit.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and live trading consequences, the description omits return/confirmation behavior, per-type required conditions, and connected-account prerequisites. The schema documents parameter names but not the call outcome or operational context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds useful grouping (order types, TIF choices, bracket orders) but does not add substantive meaning beyond the schema or clarify conditional-required parameter combinations.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Place an order with the connected broker') and enumerates order types, clearly distinguishing it from sibling order-management tools like cancel_order, modify_order, and set_brackets.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies 'use this when placing a new order,' but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over modify_order, cancel_order, or set_brackets. Context is present, but exclusions and alternative routing are left to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.